Striking Out Paul

[ahab]

I think we have to remember that Acts onward is what the church is to do to carry out the teachings and commands of Jesus or in other words what we do in the light of the events of our Lord Jesus Christ. I think the gospels are the recorded written account of the events the church decided it need to give of that revelation of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus are no more found in the gospels than the rest of the NT. The apostles and disciples who wrote the gospels were the ones who wrote the rest of the NT.

 

[Mustaphile]

The teachings of Jesus are no more found in the gospels than the rest of the NT.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

 

[Misty Minister]

Where ARE you getting this information????

Although some OLD church traditions may agree with you, most modern scholarship has Luke and Acts written by the same person, and in chronological order, probably in the 80s C.E. or maybe even later. The Gospel of John is the only one written after that. Mark was probably written in the 60s C.E., as were many of the letters attributed to Paul, and Matthew in the 70s.

No doubt all of them were changed in many ways through the years so they would support currently popular doctrines.

There is no need for the dramatic talk of throwing things out. Certain writings are clearly more important than others and more reliable than others.

If you look to the spirit of the writings, the message always comes through loud and clear........love God and neighbor, care for the poor, live a life of justice and compassion and service--and reject greed, which is idolatry.

Things become difficult only for those trying to protect archaic, self-serving and negative traditions of the religious men of old. The rest of us have no problem.

There is a notion that the letters Paul wrote were divinely inspired and should be taken with the same seriousness as the Prophets. If he did not write them, or someone else changed them, then... golly they are not divine and just advisory. That could account for the incorrect scriptural references in them.

 

[Misty Minister]

But I see no reason for him to fake it. I'm pretty sure the author of Acts made it more impressive than it was, but Paul describes it himself in Gal. 1.

Saul had pleanty of reasons to fake his vision. If the story about the blindness and the healing is not a fantasy, the deciples could have confused the collective unconcious, or something for being the revelation of God. I have seen those kind of mistakes happen in Christian communities before. "Paul is still Saul."

 

[Misty Minister]

The other day i was on a deserted road and jesus came down and talked to me and told me that he really didnt mean hell was a burning pit that unbelievers go forever. I am to go on cf and spread the word.
Do you believe me or would you like a little proof?

If you were a famous philosopher and rich and living in the ignorant times, I'm sure you would be given some credit.

Hey Hey, today you could say that, rent some television and radio time then do a tour and build up your own cult!

 

[Misty Minister]

By saying that every word he says must be true, you put him next to God. You are in fact making the man infalliable.

Pauls writings dictated from Jesus? Why did Paul misquote OT scripture? I would suppose Jesus would quote scripture correctly.

 

[Wisdom's Child]

Much of this can be avoided by simple application of The Law of Witnesses.
Balance a quote from Paul with another non-Pauline source, or use Paul as a witness for a non-Pauline quote.

 

[Misty Minister]

Foon Nerfdahl,

Love It,
Ok that gets rid of Acts and Luke
So we're down to Matthew, Mark, John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, Revelation, and possibly Hebrew.

Are you satisfied with those Books or do you want use the power God invested in you to de-canonize any other Books of the Bible?

I have a question for you Nerfdahl. Do you believe that we are put on this earth by God? If your answer is yes do you believe that the purpose of a Christian is to glorify God? Or is there another purpose for our being?

Fat

We could just make the book of paul a side volume that would include his writings, romans, gallatians etc. It is clever the way they just use the adressees of the letters as the title. It makes them seem like more than one mans opinion.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

If anyone doesn't understand just how false the ministry of Paul was by now......I don't think they're gonna get it for at least a few years. I'm satisfied with that.

Paul was in disagreement with Jesus about sin and salvation.

That's good enough for me.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

If anyone doesn't understand just how false the ministry of Paul was by now......I don't think they're gonna get it for at least a few years. I'm satisfied with that.

Paul was in disagreement with Jesus about sin and salvation.

That's good enough for me.

Yet somehow the early church didn't see it that way.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Pauls writings dictated from Jesus? Why did Paul misquote OT scripture? I would suppose Jesus would quote scripture correctly.

Most of the quotes in the Gospels, including some from Jesus, fit neither the LXX or the Hebrew, in the rest of the N.T. the LXX predominates but there are plenty of Hebrew quotes and quotes that fit neither perfectly.
The O.T. most Bibles use is (going from memory) the Hebrew. So some of the "misquotes" may be from there.

 

[ahab]

Hi Mustaphile,

The teachings of Jesus are no more found in the gospels than the rest of the NT.-ahab

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Well for example who wrote the gospels and who wrote the rest of the NT Who were of the 12 that were taught by Jesus ? Who were perhaps of the 72 disciples? Who were eye witnesses and who never saw Jesus? There is every reason to suspect that in 1 and 2 Peter, Jude and James and the gospel of John and 1 and 2 John and revelation we have witness from the 12 and Paul was taught by Jesus. There is every reason also to suspect Matthew was the apostle and Mark was around as an eye witness as well. The teachings of Jesus are found throughout the NT.

Paul and Acts onwards is as reliable as the gosples. Remember that Acts onwards is the Spirit filled church, Jesus having risen in glory, the gospels describe the life and purpose of Jesus that the church needed to preserve and Acts onwards especially with Paul's letters are more about carrying out that received from Jesus. Luke afterall is a companion of Paul and writes Acts about all the apostles and a gospel too.

 

[psalms 91]

paul laid out the meat and potatoes of christianity. if you cant understand then ask the holy spirit to help you. you remind me of the passage about not being able to feed you meat because you have not grown and have need of milk.

 

[ahab]

Amen bill16652

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

The other day i was on a deserted road and jesus came down and talked to me and told me that he really didnt mean hell was a burning pit that unbelievers go forever. I am to go on cf and spread the word.
Do you believe me or would you like a little proof?

Proof? You mean like a believer having a vision that they should take you, a known enemy of the church, into their home and care for you until you recovered?

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

It is clever the way they just use the adressees of the letters as the title. It makes them seem like more than one mans opinion.

Please tell me you aren't serious.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

I said that Paul was in disagreement with Jesus and the rest of the Bible.

And Rob said:

Yet somehow the early church didn't see it that way.

Hey Rob......who told you that? Paul and his buddy Luke, right?

 

[tulc]

Saul had pleanty of reasons to fake his vision.

... What could he stand to gain from it? He lost his standing, he lost everything he was trained for. And eventually he lost his life. I don't know seems like he got the raw end of the deal to me.
tulc(not to mention the whippings and stoning)

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

AGAIN......and this must be dangerously close to stating the obvious too obviously....the heroic, astounding and highly admirable exploits of Paul are only attested to by ........ Paul (and his buddy Luke).

 

[tulc]

AGAIN......and this must be dangerously close to stating the obvious too obviously....the heroic, astounding and highly admirable exploits of Paul are only attested to by ........ Paul (and his buddy Luke).

Ahh just like Jesus is only attested to by eyewitnesses? (for what ever reason they may have had) Or like Peter:

2Peter 3: 14-16
14So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Doesn't he seem to be saying Paul was writing scriptures also. Oh well there goes Peter also.
tulc(waiting for his coffee and a kiss from Mrs,tulc!)